Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

Strictly speaking, T&Cs or no, S&S's lawyers or no, this breach of copyright wouldn't stand up in a New York, UK or Aussie court. Of course, these forums ain't exactly private, but courtesy is the mark of civilization eh?.

If people weren’t asked, then that is, um, well out of order. I think I would feel more than a bit miffed if my (perhaps very personal?) thoughts/experiences appeared on the front cover of a newspaper - essentially, what a homepage is.

The new homepage is grey, even smaller, and far too text heavy. I understand the desire to show off the many features of this site - really, I get that, & there is much to be proud of. But I am sitting here, with full accessibility options applied, & I am truly struggling to make sense of that page. (also, am just thinking of newly diagnosed/distressed person, being confronted by reams of text, much of which would seem quite… irrelevant? I imagine)

This may not be a concern to most of the site-users. But tis a health oriented website, so accessibility should be an even higher priority. Keep it simple. Make things bigger. Change the colour scheme.

I don't normally come to these forums via the home page, so I wouldn't have noticed were it not pointed out.

Regardless, I like the look, but one thing I would say is that it might be less to absorb visually if the news headlines were eliminated and just the link to news showed. I would also move Peter's "A word from the Founder" to the top of the page. To me that would seem more welcoming to anyone new.

As for quotes from the forums, it's only a couple clicks away from reading everyone's posts so I see it as totally non threatening. Such is the nature of the Internet.

As far as "overheard in the forums" If I had started a post, and that post was brought up on the POZ home page, it most likely would not bother me. But, for courtesy sake , I wouldn't mind to be asked first.

The print : Much too small. I can't enlarge it through the view button on internet explorer. I can however enlarge the forum print through the view button. My text size is selected as "Large"

Honestly, I never go to the home page. I just checked it out, though, and it's very ... BUSY. I wonder how long it takes to open for those on dial-up? As to the 'Overheard in the Forums' section, maybe we could indicate individually whether or not we'd like our posts featured on the home page. Maybe a selection "It's ok / not ok to feature my posts on the Poz home page" would work.

I realize we don't own the forums or make the rules, but, like Matt said, it would be the courteous thing to do. Some people might not feel comfortable having something personal posted that publically. Of course, they could just not post, but that's not anybody's goal either.

It's weird, though. POZ.com has been using blurbs from our forums on their home page since April, and we've never received a single complaint. It wasn't until I announced in these forums yesterday that we were adding the same blurbs to the AIDSmeds home page that folks decided a major breach of privacy was occurring.

That said, once the POZ.com editor is back from her vacation, I'm going to discuss this with her, and raise the concerns you've mentioned.

I was also quite aware of when POZ started using the blurbs from the Forums.It is still really a non-issue with me, bit it could possibly be an issue with others, and as I mentioned earlier, perhaps a courtesy email informing would be nice. I remember quite well, when POZ started using the blurbs from the forums, and to be honest, it did raise an eyebrow on me... Thanks for taking this discussion further.

I'd like it to be noted that I found this forum by way of the "in the forums" display on POZ. To that end, I'm grateful it was there. I also fail to see it as very much of an invasion of privacy since (as mentioned above) these posts are only two or three clicks away anyway. To be honest, I didn't read every word of the "Terms of Use"...but I assumed the proprietors of this site reserved the right to do so. I consider the ability to post/share on this site a privilege, and their right to display topics of discussion in the forums fair use. If you wish to keep an subject strictly confidential, I'd suggest a PM.

Here's a thought: I think it would be a cumbersome task to personally check with each poster about the use of each post. A possible solution would be to give the poster the ability to flag a post as a "do not display" item. The icon for such could be listed alongside the "Post/Preview/Spell Check" icons.

I am not sure what the big deal is. They take a snippet of a posting on a public website and put it on a homepage anonymously. How is that an invasion of privacy? If someone scanning the homepage who had never viewed the forums and found something of interest in "Overheard on the Forums" that caused them to find this great place, how can that be bad?

Cheers,Woods

Logged

"Let us give pubicity to HV/AIDS and not hide it..." "One of the things destroying people with AIDS is the stigma we attach to it." Nelson Mandela

Although I understand Newt's point; it must be stated that this is a very public, world site, and by the very nature of this fact, we must all be cognizant of what we place here. If you are saying or typing something out that you wouldn't want heard by thousands, all at the same time, such as a stadium, then you probably shouldn't state it. Unfortunately, this leaves no room for those who are really trying to find support for some deeply personal issues, and they don't understand this fact. I really don't know the answer, but would just ask POZ and AIDSmeds to be very prudent in what they publicize. If it were my site, I would certainly use the discussions in the forums to promote participation, as it really works.

In Love

Logged

The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,and 362 to heterosexuals.This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals, It's just that they need more supervision.Lynn Lavne

Er, as far as text size goes, no, just I do research-based websites for a living, and, get this, bigger text is easier to read (like "doh!"). And improves page impressions and user satisfaction = increased revenue/reputation. (uho! commercial motive). Not to mention being kind to Americans with Disabilities and English & African people with glasses etc.

Lucky this site is unique in its (very good) quality and in a niche market, or else it would be wiped by the competition with bigger text and an appreciation of homepage theory and research (like, most of people read no more than 20 words on a website homepage). But then I guess some people only get one choice of supermarket...

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great site, better than great, esp. the forums, but it could be so much better (er, accessible and easy-to-read) wtih a little application of human-screen interaction (like, people ignore research for websites but use it for HIV treatment, pension underwriting, investments...why?).

Otherwise, web typography aside, I have an appreciateion of a fine 8+ inches vintage Pinot Noir..

Anyway, PS ignores what I say, cos "Oh, it's just newt going on again..." Never mind. One day when his eyesight gets really bad he will appreciate what I say.

(Gideon is the other big offender, all those New Testaments in hotel drawers in 6pt serif font print on flimsy paper).

Thank you, Newt, for raising this question in the first place. I agree with your position 100% except....

People's posts are not being used for "editorial." They are being used for advertising. They are advertising a chat forum, which is advertising a publication, which is partly financed by advertising from advertisers, or sponsors. (The depressing fact that the publication should have a lot more advertising is another subject worthy of discussion.) The elephant in the room is that, for whatever reasons, some of them entirely worthy and inevitable in our all too imperfect world, all of this is an example of the commercialization of AIDS in a capitalist society.

Thoughts.Re editorial: how often are the overheards being changed? presumably is done to coincide with poz magazine can we not have some sort of forum poll? mr staley/forum members suggests say, choice of 3 recent threads/posts, we vote. At that point, individual can say if they are comfortable with it being used. Etc.

Here's a thought: I think it would be a cumbersome task to personally check with each poster about the use of each post. A possible solution would be to give the poster the ability to flag a post as a "do not display" item. The icon for such could be listed alongside the "Post/Preview/Spell Check" icons.

superb suggestion. "do not display" as the DEFAULT.exhibitionist users may un-check the box, if they desire.

I always start with the home page when coming to this site and the more I see those snipets of our exchanges, the more it disturbs me. But what disturbs me most I guess is the lack of response from the webmasters and from the community itself.

I don't get it, you put something out to the ether, then complain. In fact I think in American law even a private im is not private. Which is why so many people are being warned at work. As for size, well I have no complaints, and no one has every complained about me! As for me, there are real issues out there in the real world.CheersJohnny

« Last Edit: November 02, 2006, 10:14:00 AM by alisenjafi »

Logged

"You shut your mouthhow can you sayI go about things the wrong wayI am human and I need to be lovedjust like everybody else does"The Smiths

. It wasn't until I announced in these forums yesterday that we were adding the same blurbs to the AIDSmeds home page that folks decided a major breach of privacy was occurring.Peter

How can something written in a public forum, be considered private? I would understand if I sent a pm to someone and then it got out, but let's get a reality check here. Anyone can come here and join, and even feign to have HIV who is to know. Secondly anyone can come here and cut and paste it anywhere else in the cyber world.Gee I wonder what Mark Foley thinks about this?

Logged

"You shut your mouthhow can you sayI go about things the wrong wayI am human and I need to be lovedjust like everybody else does"The Smiths

1.) Although I am no where near as computer literate as Matt, even I figured out how to globally change the font, and it's size for my own ease of viewing.

2.) This whole site is a global entity, one should understand that anything written on the pages here are globally accessable, regardless of whether a snippet is dangled as a teaser to encourage readership.

(....steps away from podium)

Logged

No Fear No Shame No StigmaHappiness is not getting what you want, but wanting what you have.

1) I went to a good clothes shop once and found all the best clothes in the storeroom out back. Kind of the manager to let me look in.

2) natch! Users think about pages, or a section not websites. People with doctorates have studied this for big corporations, to er, improve the rate or return on big investments in websites. Bet you 85% of visitors here never or rarely look at pages besides the forum.

"Yeah, it is a failure on my part. I should have known better. I did know better. So, I have only two choices. Beat myself up about it and give in.......(some days I feel like doing just that), or drive on and live. I want so much to live."

Ahem. Not quite the same.

Also, not quite the whole story on the topic eh? (next post goes "No one failed. Health, life etc, it ain't an exam. Regardless of how, or why, or what we could have done differently, we are here. Face forward.")

The webmaster may be on holiday, but the ed/owner etc ain't. Technical issues aside, perhaps a reply in principle, subject to technical considerations, on whether posters will be asked before their posts are featured and/or edited for the AM homepage?

Another thing that might make folks feel a bit better is this. How about when a reader clicks on one of the quotes on the home page, they are taken to the forum where the message is located. I know it's not a big difference, but at least it won't take the reader directly to a post which make the poster uncomfortable.

Yes indeed, David's suggestion of linking directly to the forum post is good. That way the readers will have the full context of the comment/quote. It could also encourage more Poz readers to join the forums and stimulate debate, perhaps that would be a good thing as well.

Well, Sally Chew is back from her much needed vacation, and we brought this topic up for discussion at Smart+Strong's weekly senior management meeting this morning (sounds important, but it's just six folks trying to keep our heads above water).

Everyone was in agreement -- we'd like to continue using forums quotes on the home pages of POZ and AIDSmeds. It's a great way to get the sites' first-time visitors interested in our forums, where they can get answers to their HIV-related questions and find support from other people living with HIV. It's also a fairly standard practice on websites with large online "communities" -- we definitely don't think we've been doing something unusual, or against standard practices on the Web.

Besides, we've been doing this on the POZ homepage since April, with no complaints until this thread. In addition, I've been using pull quotes from the forums in the AIDSmeds newsletter, with it's 15,000 subscribers, for a couple of years now -- these have been far more prominent than the quotes on our home pages, and probably generated far more traffic for the forums. I have never received a single complaint about the newsletter quotes. Again, the newsletter forums quotes are commonly done by other websites with community forums, including other HIV-related websites.

We will continue to pull short quotes, without attribution (the name or username from the posting won't be shown with the quote). We won't be seeking prior permission before using a quote. Everyone posting here hopefully realizes that these forums are VERY public -- anyone with an Internet connection can read your posts, and all the search engines catalogue what's written here. For instance, if you Google "Newt has HIV," a link to an AIDSmeds thread that includes a posting from Newt is the first thing on the list.

These forums actually receive more unique visitors (and FAR more page views) than the AIDSmeds home page, so we don't consider it a breach of privacy to copy some content from the most popular area of AIDSmeds to a less popular area.

One of the reasons these forums are so popular is because, like many other content areas of AIDSmeds, I've tried to actively promote them from the day I launched them. I have actively promoted Graph My Labs, Check My Meds, the Blogs, and every lesson that Tim and others have written for the site. That's one of the reasons we reach a far larger audience of people living with HIV than GMHC.org or amfar.org -- we don't just post some good content, pat ourselves on the back, and call it a day. Creating good content would be a waste of time if no one ever found it -- it requires active efforts at promotion.

As for the editing that occurred with the most recent pull quote -- this was a mistake, and we apologize. When Sally went on vacation, the staff member who was asked to pull the quotes in her absence wasn't told to pull them verbatim. It won't happen again. We will edit the quotes for grammar and spelling, and use occasional ellipses to condense long sentences or paragraphs (but not to alter the original meaning of the content).

I know this decision won't please everyone in this thread, or these forums, but I'm not sure any decision we make here does (see the thread on Time Outs!). But someone's got to run this place, and this decision is in keeping with how AIDSmeds has been run since I founded it over six years ago.

Since you brought up the graph my logs in your post, I must mention that I have issues trying to graph my logs. Everytime I try to it says my email addy is already taken. I even tried to use an alternate email addy but it still said the same thing. Can you please tell me what to do? Thanks.

While I didn't have an objection to this policy, I find your reply, Peter, rather interesting, for two very prominent reasons.

While you may not have had a complaint before, you have had one now. Accepting it rather than trying to make a case against such complaints comes across (to me) as a little brutish. Are we to infer that because a complaint has never arisen before that it ought not to have done so now? if that's not the impression you wish to impart, perhaps there is more appropriate language and strategy for disclosing your take on this procedure.

Secondly, if the purpose of the inclusion of the material on the home page is to boost visibility for first-timers but these forums already receive more hits than does that front page, perhaps there is room at a future head-above-water-session to consider tactics to make these forums more inviting to those guests who venture here. I'm sure there's room to incorporate some prominent material in the header/footer or margins that might even be hyperlinked to the post in general, when the subject matter intrigues the reader.

Just my considered observations. I like this place a great deal and have respect for the amount of time and energy that building community involves. I welcome improvement.

Thanks Peter, for responding and taking up the issue with SM. While I think it would be great if members could be informed that their comments are being displayed publicly, it's not a do-or-die issue for me. I only hope that there is some discretion used in choosing which comments to take (i.e., excluding those of extremely personal nature).

I doubt anyone would Google "Newt has HIV" on the off-chance. (MHO, an ill-considered example, using my screen name, any other circumstances/person here it would be seen as flamebait.)

Obviously these forums are public, and searchable via the web. But people don't see it that way, rightly or wrongly. High-handedness of journos, never really goes away >sigh< Surely it is not beyond the wit of man or woman to ask if people mind their posts being sampled. Seems like a basic respect. We did this for the i-Base Q & A section, complete with explicit statement on privacy, how info will be used etc. A basic respect.

I am sure there is a better way to promote and highlight the forums. The sampled post will speak to a reader who identifies with the position in the quote, but I bet for nearly all other people it will mean nothing and they will ignore it. The quotes picked so far have been "typical" positions/reactions, and do not capture the rich and varied views of posters. It misrepresents and the discussion it highlights.

Also, I don't follow your promotional logic. If most people ignore the homepage and come straight to the forums, surely the promo should be the other way round? (and why do the blogs get a bigger promo space than the forums if they are the core of AM for most visitors?)

Since you brought up the graph my logs in your post, I must mention that I have issues trying to graph my logs. Everytime I try to it says my email addy is already taken. I even tried to use an alternate email addy but it still said the same thing. Can you please tell me what to do? Thanks.

Akasha -- send an email to techsupport@aidsmeds.com with the email address you're trying, plus the exact error message you are getting.

While you may not have had a complaint before, you have had one now. Accepting it rather than trying to make a case against such complaints comes across (to me) as a little brutish. Are we to infer that because a complaint has never arisen before that it ought not to have done so now? if that's not the impression you wish to impart, perhaps there is more appropriate language and strategy for disclosing your take on this procedure.

You're right, that's not the impression I wanted to make. You had every right to complain about this. This thread has been great, and like most of the threads in these forums that challenge how we operate the site, it gets read and discussed amongst various staffers here, including senior management.

Thanks Peter, for responding and taking up the issue with SM. While I think it would be great if members could be informed that their comments are being displayed publicly, it's not a do-or-die issue for me. I only hope that there is some discretion used in choosing which comments to take (i.e., excluding those of extremely personal nature).

Cliff -- I will mention this to Sally. I agree with you on the use of some discretion when choosing quotes.

I am sure there is a better way to promote and highlight the forums. The sampled post will speak to a reader who identifies with the position in the quote, but I bet for nearly all other people it will mean nothing and they will ignore it. The quotes picked so far have been "typical" positions/reactions, and do not capture the rich and varied views of posters. It misrepresents and the discussion it highlights.

Also, I don't follow your promotional logic. If most people ignore the homepage and come straight to the forums, surely the promo should be the other way round? (and why do the blogs get a bigger promo space than the forums if they are the core of AM for most visitors?)

Edited quote still there on the homepage too....

PS - my standard retail ad blocking software (Norton) takes out all the AM navigation on the POZ.COM homepage .... is that good?

I'd rather not turn this thread into an analysis of how effective our various promotion techniques are. We look at all of this constantly, and change it up often (trying new things, dropping others). We actually spend a small fortune promoting our homepage in other ways (ads on search engines, mostly). And the blog promo area was only bigger than the forums promo area because it's quote was longer that week -- the areas re-size automatically based on how much content is in each (you'll notice that the forums quote is bigger as of today). Last week's edited quote has been replaced.

As for the Norton blocking on POZ.com -- we're aware of the issue, but can't figure out why it's happening.

It's a good site Peter, n you know I think it is and am happy to contribute. You're making this personal when its a point of principle. I have made my point, and others too, in a lively and well-read discussion, one which I believe you & your colleagues have listened to closely.